The cost to live in exurbia

RALEIGH – 9:15 a.m. -- I’m blogging today from the N.C. State Urban Design Forum. Topic du jour: “Creating Value: Designing for Resilient Cities.”

Excellent quote, to start the day, from NCSU College of Design Dean Marvin Malecha: The design of a community begins with the measure of the first human step.

9:30 a.m. Now Shelley Poticha of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. She's been active in New Urban and transportation and other community design initiatives for years. (She's speaking via Skype.) She has offered some fascinating tidbits.

Costs in Raleigh-Durham to living on the exurban edge: She ran some numbers on the combined household costs of housing and transportation in this area. For people living in the core city, she said, combined household/transportation costs are about 34-38 percent of income. But here's the amazing fact. For people living on the farthest edges of Wake County, combined housing/transportation costs can be as high as 75 percent of household income.

Federal revolution, under the radar?: 9:45 a.m. – Poticha is describing what has been an amazing, under-the-radar transformation at the federal level, where Shaun Donovan at HUD, with help from Ron Sims (former county exec for King County, Wash., i.e. Seattle) and the EPA and US DOT are – get this – trying to work together to remove federal barriers that keep cities and states from smarter urban growth/planning, or what she described as formerly being "a backwater set of issues."

They're trying to change some of the dumb stuff that doesn't require legislation. An example she cited: Used to be that HUD protocols made it impossible to use federal housing money for developing on a brownfield (former industrial) site. They changed that. Now, if you can get the EPA certificate that your site is OK, then you can get HUD money.
Another example: Used to be if your apartment building qualified for Dept. of Energy weatherization money, then you had to fill out a whole other bunch of forms for HUD. Now, no extra HUD forms needed.
(more)

Extremely cool Charlotte urban video goes viral

Of course those you who you regularly attend the monthly Civic By Design meetings (second Tuesdays at the Levine Museum, 5:30 p.m.) already saw this months ago, but for those who haven't, there's an extremely cool video of Charlotte's urban history that's in the process of going viral online The last 3 minutes of it were featured on Huffington Post.

I've heard from a number of folks around the country asking about it. Rob Carter of Brooklyn was an artist in residence at the McColl Center for Visual Art in 2007, and made the video using Charlotte's history as its theme. Be sure to listen, not just watch. The sounds are important to the experience. For instance, Charlotteans will recognize the buzzing noise, as the crown is being kicked offscreen, as that of a hornets nest. Other viewers may not know that General Cornwallis, whose troops occupied the hamlet of Charlotte for a few months during fall 1780, referred to his hostile reception as a "hornets nest of rebellion."

Watching the NFL stadium fly in and land is fun, too. The stadium's design and suburban-office-park-esque setting in what should be urban territory downtown led some local urban designers (those not on the team's payroll, at least) to complain that it looked like a flying saucer had landed.

Happy viewing.

Here is a clip from the longer video linked above:



Metropolis by Rob Carter - Last 3 minutes from Rob Carter on Vimeo.

REBIC's long list of 'No's'

Several months back I had coffee with the affable Andy Munn, policy director for the Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, aka REBIC, the most influential local real estate and development lobbying group. I got the idea that the group, which in the past has had (my words here, not his) a "Just Say No" reputation among local government staffers and environmental and planning activists, might be trying to change its image a bit.

Fast forward to Monday night's City Council meeting ("Foxx: Be flexible with developers"), where REBIC members were out in force. Mayor Anthony Foxx had put onto the agenda a staff presentation about a cluster of new measures that REBIC doesn't like:
- the proposed (not yet adopted) stronger tree ordinance.
- the Urban Street Design Guidelines policy (not yet adopted into ordinances and thus, not required of developers, either)
- the post-construction controls ordinance (the only one developers currently must actually follow). Many big guns were in attendance: Bill Daleure of Crosland Inc., Ned Curran of the Bissell Companies, as well as Charlotte Chamber honcho Bob Morgan.

As the Observer editorial board opined this morning ("Don't let 'flexible' morph into 'gutting' ") just building cheap isn't always smart. When you add in the future costs to taxpayers to retrofit and expand your street network/restore polluted streams/mitigate flooding -- i.e. millions of dollars -- it makes the estimated increment of $1,900 to $2,900 to the cost of new housing (spread over a 30-year mortgage) seem a bit less of a problem.

That said, a city that didn't look seriously at the combined effects of its regulations on the costs of building would be irresponsible. The point is to look at the big picture and make intelligent choices, as best you can. Further, I hear developers of all types, not just the REBIC types, complain about bureaucratic nightmares dealing with multiple government agencies on complicated plans and technical issues. So complaints about lack of flexibility and/or inconsistencies resonate with me.

But here's a problem: Even when REBIC has legitimate points it's virtually impossible to sort them out from the cloud of anti-everything rhetoric it's been floating for something like 30 years.

I recall a famous scene when then-REBIC executive director Mark Cramer spoke at a City Council debate in 1998 over whether to require developers to build more sidewalks in new subdivisions. Of course REBIC opposed it, because it would force developers to spend more money on subdivisions. (Though I must say I doubt they had to shrink their profit margins.) Cramer, after listening to pleas for good sidewalks on behalf of children, the elderly and people in wheelchairs, noted that sidewalks are good things. But, he added: "You can have too much of a good thing.''

I think REBIC and its close relative, the Chamber's land use committee, would have more credibility in many of its complaints if it hadn’t, over the years, fought virtually every environmental and growth-management measure proposed by local governments, dating to before the term Smart Growth was even invented.

It's a long list. It includes: the city bicycle plan, the floodplain ordinance, the stream buffer ordinance, watershed ordinances, the aforementioned sidewalk requirements, a county farmland preservation measure, a pilot project in Huntersville to preserve rural land and efforts a few decades ago to channel the overdevelopment in South Charlotte into other areas by limiting where new sewer lines are built. (That last is a classic planning technique being used all over the country – but not in Charlotte-Mecklenburg. Developer John Crosland Jr. simply got state government to give him permits for private sewer plants and kept on building subdivisions.)

Quite an impressive list of opposition, I'd say. And to be fair I will note that anyone is free to lobby any elected official on anything. When environmental regulations and planning initiatives are gutted or stalled for years, and when city staff is ordered to "compromise with developers" over already-compromised proposals – a tradition staffers hired from other metro areas have told me privately they're shocked to hear here – it's elected officials who do that, not REBIC.

Ballantyne 'affordable housing'? It was there at the start

It turns out that affordable housing – a better term is "below market-rate housing" – was required to be built in Ballantyne as part of its rezoning request, which county commissioners approved in November 1991. This was more than just a verbal agreement from developer Johnny Harris. It was part of the legally enforceable zoning agreement. And the housing was built. (This relates to Tommy Tomlinson's column today, "Is public housing Ballantyne's IOU?", in which he notes that we taxpayers spent millions to create the highways that allowed Ballantyne to prosper.)

Planning consultant Walter Fields, who for many years was land development manager for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg planning staff, worked with the Harris family over a period of years, starting in the 1980s, about their development plans for what used to be called "The South Farm," a beautiful tract that was part of late Gov. Cameron Morrison's vast property holdings.

"There was definitely something in there [the rezoning agreement] and they definitely did it," he told me. He recalled it was small-lot, single family housing. And he pointed out one problem with those sorts of "affordable housing" provisions: Unless other mechanisms are in place the housing is below-market rate when it's first sold, but after than it sells for whatever anyone can sell it for. Which is why, let me note, there's still a need for below-market rate housing in the area.

Today, Ballantyne is awash with apartments, which Fields points out are another form of "affordable housing." He was approached, he says, by a lot of people for help in fighting the now-dropped proposal for subsidized apartments at Providence Road West and Johnston Road. "I turned them all down," he says. As a consultant he often advocates for multifamily.

And, he recalls, during negotiations with the city-county planning department over Ballantyne the planners were continually pushing the importance of a mix of housing types at Ballantyne.

But the project was controversial, not least because that was in the era when Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools was really trying to integrate its schools, because it was legally required to, part of a court order in effect. (Today, schools in the Ballantyne area are far less integrated than in much of the rest of the county; Hawk Ridge Elementary is 10 percent black; Community House Middle and Ardrey Kell High are 12 percent black.) Some school board members weren't happy about the prospect of a vast sea of white kids that they'd be required to bus long distances – or, conversely, having to bus another sea of nonwhite kids long distances. Of course, that problem got solved by the dissolving of the court order to integrate ...

This is from an article in October 1991, by the Observer's Liz Chandler:
"Louise Woods [who later served on the school board], representing a citizens group, urged commissioners to make Harris detail how many low- and moderate-income homes he will build.
"We request that the Ballantyne proposal include a section of affordable moderate- and low-income housing," Woods said in a letter signed by seven others.
Woods also said school and county officials should scrutinize Harris' plans to ensure Ballantyne is an integrated community. Neighboring subdivisions are predominantly white. The group is concerned about what they see is a trend resulting in long bus rides for black students brought in to achieve integration."

Suburb slums? (Shhhh, don't tell Ballantyne)

I caught an intriguing "Urban Vs. Suburban" discussion on WFAE's Charlotte Talks this morning, interviewing Christopher Leinberger, author of the March 2008 article in The Atlantic magazine, "The Next Slum?"

His article opened with an anecdote from the Windy Ridge subdivision in northwest Charlotte. (A Charlotte Observer article later, in January 2009, reported that half the homes in Windy Ridge had been through foreclosure. And six months after, in July 2009, another Observer article said it's one of the neighborhoods hit so badly by foreclosures that Habitat for Humanity is buying the houses, now costing less than what Habitat would spend building a new one, and will rehab them and sell them to Habitat-worthy families.)

Also on the show was Jen Pilla Taylor, who wrote a piece for the January edition of Charlotte magazine, "Tale of Two Cities" in which she writes about the growing divide between urban and suburban parts of Charlotte.

"Much of the time, the two worlds are largely indifferent toward one another," she wrote. "Much of the suburban set is apathetic about the city, with many suburbanites rarely if ever visiting uptown unless they work there. Urban dwellers see the 'burbs as too far away, too rural, too cookie-cutter. But tensions bubble up in public spats fought primarily by activists and elected officials."

But Leinberger, a planning professor at the University of Michigan as well as a real estate developer, talked about the market forces and trends that, he has predicted, will bludgeon property values for suburban and ex-urban houses – due to oversupply and to a growing preference for "walkable" neighborhoods. He said on WFAE that the federal bailout of suburban housing has been much larger than the bank or auto industry bailouts. Interesting way to look at it. (This may buttress his point: A November 2008 Observer story reported, "Because it has such a high concentration of foreclosures and subprime mortgages, Charlotte is in line to get $5.4 million [in federal money] to help stabilize its neighborhoods.)

More recently, MSN Real Estate took on the same topic, "Is your suburb the next slum?" a sort of "Leinberger Lite" that quoted Leinberger and some of the same data.

All the articles make clear that not all suburban neighborhoods are the same and that many are thriving and will continue to. Nor do they present every urban neighborhood as nirvana.

But the data show that the more walkable areas with neighborhood centers of stores and workplaces are more likely to do better in the future real estate market than those made up only of auto-oriented single-family housing.

I guess we won't know whose predictions are coming to pass until the local real estate market revives.

Your face on the side of a CATS bus?

Carolyn Flowers, CEO of the Charlotte Area Transit System, tells me today that she expects the issue of advertising on CATS vehicles to come up at the Wednesday meeting of the Metropolitan Transit Commission. Here's a link to the agenda.

Former CATS CEO Ron Tober nixed the advertising early on in his tenure. He told me he thought it was important, in launching a new transit service, for it to look professional and clean. And certainly, the Lynx Blue Line has been very successful. I am not sure how much of that is due to the lack of advertising placards and how much to other factors, though I suspect the latter.

That said, they should look into the advertising. With the half-cent transit sales tax revenues dropping to 2005 levels, I think they could trade off some pristine appearances in exchange for some cash. Flowers said the most recent estimate, at least a year old and done by the City of Charlotte, said ads could bring in from $590,000 to $2.6 million a year. (Transit sales tax revenues this year are projected at $57 million, with 2010-11 projections at $59.4 million.)

(Note: Flowers' father died today in California. She's traveling to the West Coast and expects to be gone several days.)

'Road hater'? Read the facts, please

To all the folks bent out of shape because I suggested that NC DOT might have fared better if it had pushed for stimulus money for the commuter rail line in Mecklenburg instead of to repair the Yadkin River bridge, please read what I wrote, both Thursday and Wednesday.

I never said the Yadkin bridge shouldn't be fixed. Indeed, I called it "sorely needed." I never said commuter rail was more important. I wrote that it might be possible the state would have gotten money for commuter rail had they pushed it instead of the bridge project - a strategic decision in the realm of competing for stimulus money.

In yesterday's piece I called the bridge project "sorely needed" and also said: "In any case, now that the state has learned the bridge repair project gets only $10 million in stimulus money, it's moving to start the repairs in a few months."

On Wednesday, I wrote: "The state does have $180 million money set aside for Phase 1 of the Yadkin bridge project. It can start work as early as June, he [Conti] said. That money will pay to replace and widen to eight lanes the I-85 bridge, the U.S. 29-70 bridge and reconstruct the N.C. 150 interchange. So I-85 will go from eight lanes to four, as it does now, then widen to eight again over the bridge."

That means, as I wrote, THE BRIDGE WORK IS STARTING. THE STATE HAS MONEY. Indeed, stimulus money is supposed to go to projects that won't get done otherwise. Is it possible that was another strike against the Yadkin bridge project?

It's one thing to be mad about a rickety bridge. I completely agree. But how about reading the facts BEFORE you start with the insults?

I've been contemplating shutting down comments completely, because so many people are such jerks that it seems to just bring out the hostility all around. Thoughts?

In hindsight, maybe bridge idea not so hot

Even hindsight isn't always 20-20 of course, but if you look at the breakdown of which transportation projects across the U.S. won pieces of that $1.5 billion in federal stimulus money, it's pretty clear the feds were favoring transit, rail and pedestrian projects. The top-ranked highway-only project was 10th on the list.

So did N.C. officials miscalculate by putting their big weight on repairing highway bridges over the Yadkin River, instead of making a big push for Mecklenburg County's languishing-for-lack-of-federal-money commuter rail line? Charlotte and CATs submitted the request, of course, but in order to be team players with N.C. DOT and the governor they weren't pulling out the big guns to lobby for it.

New York City's project to improve dowdy Penn Station (the "Moynihan Station, Phase 1") got $83 million. The "Tuscon Modern Streetcar" project won $63 million. A commuter rail project in Massachusetts ("the Fitchburg commuter rail extension and Wachusett station") won $55.5 million. The DC area got $58 million for bus enhancements, and Philadelphia got $54 million for pedestrian and bicycle improvements. A lot of the money went for freight rail improvements, too.

"Selected projects must foster job creation, show strong economic benefits, and promote communities that are safer, cleaner and more livable," the press release said. Later, it said the 22 so-called "livability projects" were "aimed at giving Americans more choices about how they travel and improving access to economic and housing opportunities in their communities."

I think North Carolina's Yadkin River bridge project, although a sorely needed repair job, failed to score on the "cleaner and more livable" factors. And I think it's quite possible the shovel-ready but fed-funding-lacking North Corridor commuter rail line to Davidson would have hit high marks for "cleaner and more livable," because of its obvious connection to more environmentally sound development, and for taking a load of traffic off I-77. It's an example of regional cooperation, too, with four municipalities (Charlotte, Huntersville, Cornelius and Davidson) involved.

Conti demurred when I asked him to second-guess the request on Thursday. "It would have been just as hard to get any significant funding for the North Corridor," he said. I wonder.

In any case, now that the state has learned the bridge repair project gets only $10 million in stimulus money, it's moving to start the repairs in a few months.

NC wins "honorable mention" grant for Yadkin bridge

Might the N.C. DOT have made a bad call in applying for $300 million in stimulus money to rebuild the Yadkin River bridge on I-85, instead of using the opportunity to try to snag more mass transit money? DOT Secretary Gene Conti doesn't think so.

The grants - made public Wednesday - were part of the $1.5 billion in so-called TIGER Grant funding, for transportation projects, all part of the federal stimulus bill. North Carolina got $10 million for the Yadkin bridge project.

Here's a complete breakdown from the U.S. DOT.

I just hung up from a phone interview with Conti, who said in total, 10 projects from North Carolina were submitted, including a request from Charlotte and the Metropolitan Transit Commission to fund the proposed-but-got-no-money commuter rail line between downtown and Davidson. Conti said N.C. projects were worth $845 million. Across the country, he said, $57 billion worth of projects were requested.

Looking at the projects that got the big bucks – and it's worth remembering that when you're talking transportation projects, $1.5 billion really isn't very much to spread around the country – transit and multimodal and rail projects seem to have done better than highway projects. The organization Reconnecting America did a breakdown: highway projects received 23 percent of funding, while transit projects 26 percent, multimodal projects received 25 percent, rail projects won 19 percent and ports 7 percent.

Note that a $45 million streetcar project in New Orleans won – $45 million. A $58 million downtown streetcar project in Dallas, Texas, got $23 million. Tucson, Ariz., got $63 million for a $150 million, 4-mile streetcar line.

You'll see some language on the US DOT document, if you read it, about North Carolina being eligible for "optional innovative financing enhancements to support a direct loan for up to one-third of the project costs." I asked Conti what that meant. "That's a good question," he said ruefully. It means, he said, that N.C. could cash in the $10 million now for a $100 million loan. But without a revenue stream to repay the loan (such as a toll road might have) it's best to just take the cash, he said.

The state does have $180 million money set aside for Phase 1 of the Yadkin bridge project. It can start work as early as June, he said. That money will pay to replace and widen to eight lanes the I-85 bridge, the U.S. 29-70 bridge and reconstruct the N.C. 150 interchange. So I-85 will go from eight lanes to four, as it does now, then widen to eight again over the bridge.

A farmer praises the Thread Trail

The Observer News Enterprise in Newton (outside Hickory, in Catawba County) has an interesting interview with a farmer who's a fan of the planned Carolina Thread Trail.

Stanly Stewart, who's been a grain farmer for 35 years, says some farmers worry that a trail near or on their land would bring litter and vagrants.

But Stewart says, public trails aren't the big threat to farmers: "The major threat to farming is unbridled development,” he said. He's right. Suburban sprawl and even rural sprawl are eating away at this region's last farmland – ironic in an era when so many people are rediscovering the importance of locally grown foods and meat.

He has experience that proves his point. Stewart’s family owns land around Murray’s Mill, the article reports. It says, "They decided to build trails around the land for people to enjoy the property. Since the area was opened to the public, the amount of trash has greatly decreased. Stewart attributes the decrease to the public’s renewed interest in the land around the trails.
“When you light up an area, the dark goes away,” he said."

The Thread Trail is a plan for a connecting network of trails throughout the Charlotte region. Each community gets to plan where the trails would go. No land would be taken by eminent domain. In Charlotte, a small portion runs alongside Little Sugar Creek, through Freedom Park. Someday, if all goes well, you could walk from uptown Charlotte to South Carolina, or to Crowders and Kings Mountain.

Parking gives way to sidewalks (update)

Here's a city that's not afraid to try new things. San Francisco is taking away some parking spaces in order to have wider sidewalks. Here's a link to the full article, courtesy SF.streetsblog.org

Gee. In Charlotte we're still trying to get the city to allow MORE onstreet parking – as a way to slow traffic and avoid having to build surface lots or decks. They were on the right track but after 9/11 someone deep in the bowels of the CMGC decided Osama was planning to park a bomb-laden truck outside all the local banks, so a lot of the parking vanished. Interestingly, no such protection was afforded to the daily newspaper office (or the weekly ones for that matter) or multiple other businesses uptown.

Update, 5:35 p.m., from Charlotte Department of Transportation's Jim Kimbler: It turns out Charlotte is doing a small version of what SF is, along Fifth Street between North Tryon and Church streets. Kimbler told me via e-mail that the city is helping the retail property owner at the Ivey's building, Stefan Latorre, who plans to open the interior restaurant space onto Fifth. It would mean wider sidewalks and removing the on-street parking on that block.

"Both the widened sidewalks and the removal of parking are consistent with the Center City Transportation Street Enhancement Standards," Kimbler wrote. "We believe this will help activate this street with outdoor dining and more comfortable sidewalk space."

(And no, Mayor Gavin Newsom is no relation. But at least he spells his name right.)

City leaps to fix hazard

This updates my report Monday on the ugly post in the uptown sidewalk, mentioned in yesterday's blog posting about some pedestrian hazards I encountered uptown.

I just got e-mail from Tamara Blue, customer service manager of Charlotte Department of Transportation: "I wanted to let you know the post is being cut down as I type this. We very much appreciate you letting us know about this trip hazard. Unfortunately, we can’t be everywhere at all times and knowing citizens like you will let us know when there is a problem is a tremendous help."

Kudos to the city for solving a small but dangerous pedestrian hazard. Now if only they can figure out how to inspire folks to shovel their sidewalks after it snows, and to rake off the leaf piles ...

Walking uptown? Good luck

Without question downtown Charlotte is the most pedestrian-friendly neighborhood in town. But there are still some, ahem, issues. I spotted a few during a Sunday afternoon walk through downtown.

For instance, although the city code says property owners are supposed to keep the sidewalks in front of their property free of obstruction, on Sunday afternoon some spots that were in the shade were still filled with slushy ice, such as the spot in front of the restaurant Press on West Trade Street. No, it isn't fair that some people get the sun to do the work for them. Life isn't fair. Clear your sidewalks, please.

Unfortunately, the city doesn't do what many Northern cities do - you get a certain number of hours to clear your sidewalks of snow and then you're cited (in theory, at least). In recent snowy weekends I've noticed that hardly anyone seems to feel it's important to shovel the sidewalk in front of their home - not just uptown either. The result is dangerous ice and slush, and pedestrians having yet more difficulties getting around.

Charlotte has no staff or policies about enforcing the few ordinances it does have, such as keeping sidewalks clear of obstructions. A large pile of leaves was composting in the sidewalk in front of the County Services Center annex building on North College Street. (And since 2001 I've been watching some leaves actually turn into compostable soil on a sidewalk on Runnymede between Alexander Graham Middle School and Sharon Road. In addition, I noticed in fall 2008 that a section of sidewalk on Sharon Road, on the back end of a very exclusive and expensive property, was ankle deep in leaves - as though the property owner had no idea it was his/her responsibility to keep it clear.)

And finally, here's something you don't want to stumble over on a dark night uptown. Come on, guys, just get a hacksaw out and cut that one all the way to the pavement. It's on Fourth Street, just a few feet uphill from College.

Envisioning streetcar stops

What should the stops look like for the city's proposed streetcar project? You can weigh in next Thursday, Feb. 18, 6-8 p.m., at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center in Room 267.

A press release from the city and from the Charlotte Area Transportation System (CATS) quotes John Mryzgod, civil engineer with the city: “It is important we understand what the public would like to see because it gives us the tools to not only design a streetcar stop, but to design a stop that ties in with the fabric of the community.”

(Background: The CATS plan for transit for 2030 includes a streetcar. The city of Charlotte doesn't want to wait that long so it is going to try to build the streetcar without CATS funding. So far, it is working on planning and engineering but doesn't have construction money. It is, though, applying for a federal grant to build a 1.5-mile segment of the proposed 10-mile project.)

I will add my two-cents' worth here, instead of at the hearing:

• Why does a streetcar line need "stops" that must be "designed"? On other streetcar systems I've seen – most recently Toronto, but including Rome and New Orleans – you just got onto the streetcar in the street, as you would a bus. Obviously, thought must go into things such as where it stops, how to sell the tickets (or maybe just use machines that take money, as buses do?) and which stops will be busy enough so benches and shelter might be offered. Other than that, don't spend money on anything more than an easily spotted sign and the same amenities you'd offer at a bus stop.

The stations on the Lynx Line were way, way over-designed, IMHO, and more reminiscent of subway (aka "heavy rail") stops or commuter rail stations. Maybe CATS figured that in a city of transit newbies we'd need something prettier and more noticeable than just a spot to buy tickets and some shelter while we wait.

• That said, shade, shelter from the rain and a spot to sit would be welcome at the busier streetcar stops. So, too, would be system maps plus route and schedule information about the streetcar. The maps should show what major attractions are at each stop – the arena, the county courthouse, police station, Central Piedmont Community College, Presbyterian Hospital, Johnson C. Smith University, etc.

• And I will take this opportunity to lodge a gripe about something that's bugged me for years about CATS bus stops, although to be fair I'll note bus stops are much improved in recent years. But why not a shelter with a roof that shades you from the sun? Bus shelter roofs should be opaque, not tinted plastic. This is the South, for crying out loud. It gets mighty hot here. Shade is vital.

To learn more about the Charlotte Streetcar Project, please visit http://www.charlottefuture.com/ or try this link.

Without tax reform, is NC bond rating at risk?

State Treasurer Janet Cowell, speaking Wednesday night to the annual dinner for the Centralina (NOT Metrolina) Council of Governments, said something that perked up my ears considerably.

She said, in response to a question from Belmont Mayor Richard Boyce, asking what the role of the state treasurer is in comprehensive tax reform:

Cowell said that in talks with bond rating agencies N.C. officials were told that they want the state to reform its tax structure, so it's more stable. Without reform, she said, we could be put on a watch list. Cowell says she told this to N.C. Senate Majority Leader Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe. "I don't think we have the luxury of doing nothing," she said.

Here's why this should be of interest to more than just tax policy geeks (I plead guilty to being one). The state's revenue system, which depends primarily on income taxes and sales taxes, was set up in the Depression. It doesn't recognize the many economic changes that have taken place in the 80 years since then - the loss of manufacturing, the rise in the service economy, the explosion of online commerce (most of it untaxed). The sales tax is among the most volatile of taxes, fluctuating greatly when times are good, or bad. Income taxes are less volatile but still show big dips and surges depending on the economy's strength. (Update: 4:45 PM - State Sen. Dan Clodfelter tells me that the problem in North Carolina is that income tax revenue is more volatile than sales tax. "The single most volatile, unpredictable, unreliable tax is the corporate income tax, and that fact has nothing to do with exemptions, loopholes, concessions, or anything of that ilk," he e-mailed me. He's a major mover pushing for tax reform and wants to do away with the corporate income tax.)

The state keeps going to those same buckets - sales taxes on goods, and income taxes. A tax reform proposal in the legislature would lower the general sales tax rate but extend the sale tax to some - not all - services. It would do other stuff, such as tinker with business privilege license taxes - which has alarmed the folks at the city of Charlotte, which gets about $16.6 million a year from that little revenue stream.

The upshot of all this is that many states have attempted comprehensive tax reform and few have succeeded. Every business with a loophole fights like mad to keep it. Because the reform would raise some taxes and lower others, some of the "I'm anti-tax" blowhards take up sloganeering against it on grounds that it raises taxes, carefully neglecting to mention that some taxes go down (like, say, the overall sales tax rate).

But for Cowell to weigh in with the specter of bond rating repercussions does imply that folks in the power offices in Raleigh are taking this reform effort seriously. Or at least, that they ought to.

(And if you're still with me here, you are clearly a tax policy geek, too, in which case you'll enjoy the latest State of the States 2010 report from the Pew Center on the States.)

Another road diet, this one for South Tryon

This is a street project I can love. The city wants to widen the sidewalks on South Tryon Street over I-277, plus create bike lanes. The picture above is an artist's rendering of what it might look like, looking north toward the skyline. Note the lovely Charlotte Observer building at left, just over the bridge. Here's what it looks like now. The idea is to make South Tryon Street between Stonewall Street (the corner where the Observer office and the Gantt Center sit) and Carson Boulevard (the street formerly known as Independence Boulevard until I-277 was born) more suitable for pedestrians and bicyclists. If you want to hear more, there's a public meeting today at 5:30 p.m. at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center, in room 280.

The city intends to start with a 90-demonstration project, starting March 15. They'll temporarily restripe the lanes on the pavement and put up bollards. Tryon will go from four lanes to three - two northbound and one southbound - between Stonewall and Carson. "It's going to require some signal phase tweaking" for the traffic light at Morehead and Tryon, says Jim Kimbler with the Charlotte Department of Transportation.

The goal is to turn the excessively wide four-lanes into three lanes with better sidewalks, especially over the bridge. Currently when you walk over the I-277 bridge you're on a 5-foot back-of-curb sidewalk looking down on traffic zooming below. It is not pleasant. And because I work at that spot I can report that traffic on Tryon is usually sparse. Jay-walking is routine, and easy.

Why a demonstration project? The bridge is state-owned, as is South Tryon south of Morehead, so the N.C. DOT has veto power, and it wants to make sure that the changes won't foul traffic or hurt the bridge. If the state agrees the "street diet" will work, then the city will move forward.

Tryon between Morehead and Carson isn't as wide as the section over I-277. Kimbler said the sidewalks there won't be widened right away, because the city hopes development in the near future will produce better sidewalks. Let us hope that is the case, or that the city will improve the sidewalks if no development ensues in a year or so. The photo here is what the sidewalk is like now. It is not a scene that makes your heart sing.

1977 Charlotte plan - Back to the future?

From the files of things I found looking up other things:

I was leafing through the dusty old reports my former colleague Tom Bradbury bequeathed, in hopes of finding when Park Road was four-laned, before writing our editorial opinion in the trees vs. sidewalk flap. (I shall note that from what I can tell, most readers prefer the trees.)

The stack of old reports even includes the 1960 Wilbur Smith and Associates "Charlotte Metropolitan Area: A Master Highway Transportation Plan." Cool. Someday I'll read it more thoroughly.

But it was in the 1977 Charlotte-Mecklenburg Thoroughfare Plan, prepared by H.J. "Herman" Hoose, transportation planning coordinator, and W.E. McIntyre, director of the Planning Commission, that I found some interesting recommendations.

They're taken from the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1975. You be the judge of how well Charlotte-Mecklenburg followed those 1975 recommendations (bold-face emphasis mine, in case you are missing the sarcasm):

• To meet the needs of a diverse population, plan for different types and densities of housing in all areas of the community through carefully controlled implementation procedures.
• Plan for all types of services, commercial, governmental and other needs, through carefully controlled implementation procedures to minimize the impact on the land. These to be provided in convenient proximity to residential communities.
• Plan for a more efficient transportation system; for a more equal balance between auto travel and mass transit opportunities.
• Plan for more parks and open spaces to enhance the visual and physical environment of the community.
• Plan for high visual quality of suburban growth with higher density uses located and designed to support mass transit.

Hmmm. About those parks: I heard once that the City of Charlotte went for something like 75 years without buying land for a single park. Not until city and county park departments were combined in the 1990s were any new parks created inside the city. A shout-out to those decades of City Council members throughout the 20th century whose legacies include a sadly park-poor city.

A quick bit of research in the Observer's archives found this from a 1985 article by then-Observer reporter Mae Israel (who's moved back to Charlotte after years at the Washington Post, for those of you who remember her). The piece is about 1985 city candidates' support (or lack of it) for a 2005 plan.

"One policy in the 1995 Plan encouraged city council members to clip the spread of restaurants, car washes and convenience stores along busy streets by denying rezoning requests.
For the most part, they didn't do it. Albemarle Road in east Charlotte, for instance, now is lined with commercial development and choked by traffic. ... (Remember, this was written in 1985.)
"The plan's centerpiece policy called for encouraging metropolitan service centers, or urban villages, to slow suburban sprawl. Concentrating public services, homes and businesses was expected to ease traffic congestion and strain on utilities.
"Politicians never directed city staffers to develop strategies for starting such centers, and the sprawl continued, mostly in southeast Charlotte. "

Of course, I can't be too negative. After all, in 1994 (a short 19 years after the 1975 plan) Charlotte City Council adopted a "Centers and Corridors" concept - not an adopted plan, certainly nothing as specific as actual zoning standards. Since 2008, an effort to update that concept and create more specific policies has been ongoing on in the Planning Department. It hasn't been adopted yet.

I think it takes a heap of patience to be a city planner here.

Revamp of transportation planning? (Or, toss the dwarfs?)

TRYON, N.C. - During council discussion about transportation, Mayor Anthony Foxx mentioned a key issue: Among the many challenges to finding federal funding for Charlotte-area transportation projects - streets, roads and mass transit alike - is that the feds are looking closely at how well a region is supporting regional transportation planning.

And the Charlotte region plans its transportation regionally about as well as I can dunk a basketball. Is there any other large metro region with more different "metropolitan planning organizations" - aka, the state-established way to plan transportation? Charlotte region transportation is split among 4 or 5 MPOs and two Rural Planning Organizations. Just one small example of the ridiculousity: The Lake Norman area is considered a Rural Planning Organization and not part of the Charlotte metro transportaton planning.

I've ranted about this previously. Small hope in the offing? At least the mayor and other transportation officials are talking about it. And MPOs must be reconstituted after every census. And NCDOT chief Gene Conti is actually paying attention to Charlotte. NCDOT now has a staffer with an office on the 8th floor of the Char-Meck Govt Center.

If you'd like to know a bit more about the unbelievable insanity of transportation planning in the greater Charlotte region, read this piece from early January - you have to go to the very end to read about what "sounds like a bizarre camaraderie of dwarfs: MUMPO, GUAMPO, CRMPO, GHMPO and RFATS (in the Disney version he'd be the chubby, clumsy one). Let us not forget LNRPO and RRRPO (the small but snarling pirate dwarf?)."

'Differences of opinion' on transit plans

TRYON, N.C. - After the lunch break at the City Council retreat (great blackberry cobbler! - and yes, the Observer journalists pay for their own lunch) talk has turned to transportation.

Hard to blog and take notes and listen simultaneously, but lotta talk about concern in North Meck and on the MTC about whether the North transit line should have been built ahead of the NE line and the streetcar. Of course, no MTC money is being used to build the city's streetcar project, but, as City Manager Curt Walton said, at the recent Metropolitan Transit Commission meeting, city officials showed CATS data to prove that no CATS/MTC money going to the streetcar, "But they didn't believe it." He also cited what he said was "a legitimate difference of opinion" about whether the Northeast line or the North line should be moving forward next.

What Walton didn't say, but that savvy transit officials would, is that the Bush administration's rules on how to rate transit projects' cost-efficiency meant the North corridor did not qualify for any federal money, and the NE corridor just squeaked in by the skin of its teeth. If someone is to be bludgeoned about why the North corridor is not being built, folks might want to be looking toward the Federal Transit Administration and the previous administration. ( Note: The Obama administration has announced that it's changing those rules on how to rate transit projects.)

And CDOT director Danny Pleasant just now made that point, as I was typing the above. Neither the North Corridor nor the streetcar qualified for fed transit funds under the old rules. But things are changing.

'I think that I shall never see ... '

(Something more interesting for you, while the council debates wording of its Focus Area Documents - "public" safety vs. "community" safety vs. "Focus Area Two"):

Those readers interested in the sidewalk v. trees issue from Park Road (story here, editorial here) might enjoy this 1952 exchange of letters between Ray Warren, executive director, Greensboro Housing Authority, and H.L. Medford, Greensboro director of public works.

In a March 18, 1952 letter, Warren asks that a huge oak tree on Florida Street not be removed for a sidewalk. His letter uses some effusive prose, ends with Joyce Kilmer's ode to trees: "I think that I shall never see," etc. etc.

Medford, in a March 21, 1952, response, uses even more florid prose ("The poet, drunk with the goodness of nature, nature as moulded by the hand of God with no adulterations of mimicing man ...") and concludes with a parody of the famous Kilmer poem:

I think that I shall never see
A tree where a tree shouldn't be;
A tree whose hungry roots are pressed
Into the sewer, choking its breast.
A tree that drops its leaves all day
and clogs all drains unless we pray,
A tree that may in summer tear
A block of street and cause grey hair
Its branches on the street are lain,
They must be removed in torrents of rain;
It heaves the walk day by day
An accident occurs: the City must pay!
Nobody loves a tree like me
but I like a tree where a tree should be.

And, Medford's letter concludes: "In other words, Ray, I still think the tree should be removed."

Two immediate observations:
1. I don't think city bureaucrats today write as well, or as poetically.
2. I'm glad municipal public works officials today aren't quite so anti-tree as to think none belong in a city!

How special interests affect city business

TRYON, N.C. - From Charlotte City Council retreat. They've just wrapped up discussion on the council-staff operating agreement. And Michael Barnes (District 4) brought up an interesting point: With all this talk about treating people with mutual respect and sharing information, etc., how do you account for the reality of special interest groups? (I'm paraphrasing there.)
"A lot of people are impacted by special interest groups and they don't tell us – staff and elected officials." Third-party groups will meet with staff, or elected officials, and then things change. "If you're not party to those third-party discussions, you don't know what's happening," Barnes said. "You don't know what the arrangements are between the special interest groups and staff or elected officials."
Ultimately, he said, that's the reality of politics.

He's hit on a key point – and one that hurts mutual trust. If a staffer has been browbeaten by developers (just to take an example), and dials back on a proposal how are elected officials to know? Or, for instance, if elected officials decide to throw some candy toward a civic group they favor, how is staff supposed to deal with that?

But after Barnes brought that up, the honorables just sort of said um, and ended that chapter of the retreat agenda.

Live, it's pols in Tryon (NC, not Street)

I checked in about 8:15 to the Charlotte City Council retreat in Tryon, N.C., where a "winter storm event" is scheduled to hit about midnight. So far, no word that the honorables plan anything other than to gut it out and then slide home on U.S. 74 and I-85 tomorrow afternoon.

This morning they're hashing out the "council/staff operating agreement" which, if you pay attention to issues as they move through the process, is actually rather significant. Maybe. Depends on whether they abide by what they come up with. It repeats the words "mutual respect" several times. As if, perhaps, staff has been feeling beat up on by some elected officials in the past? AND as if, perhaps, elected officials have felt as if staff was treating them like children in the past? (Those are my observations only. Nothing that direct has been said here.)

The issue of whether to include the word "risk" in the document vs. adding the word "creative" came up. CDOT head Danny Pleasant suggested that the document should pair creativity with "risk tolerance." I.e., creativity means you take some risks.

MORE to come, on the role of special interest groups.

City Council, here we come

Heading out to Tryon, N.C., to attend the Charlotte City Council's annual retreat. Will be blogging and Tweeting (@marynewsom and, sometimes @nakedcityblog) if wireless connections are good. Stay tuned, starting Thursday ayem.

Seeking "stakeholders"

If you've been on a "stakeholder committee" for the city of Charlotte (or Mecklenburg County, for that matter) and would be willing to undergo a short interview about your experience, please e-mail me today at mnewsom@charlotteobserver.com I'm writing my Saturday op-ed column about the stakeholder experience. (An aside, I got plenty of reaction to the uptown retail column of last week, but with no access to e-mail for most of the week I couldn't do a follow-up column. Maybe next week?)

And yes, our e-mail at the Observer is finally back in full this morning. I noticed that without e-mail I did a lot more walking around our office – is e-mail part of what's making Americans obese? And I noticed that once it was restored in a sort of circa 1993 version, 85 percent of what was in there was Viagra spam, Pfizer spam, "Russian girls" spam, press releases from GOP congressional PR folk and some over-the-transom op-eds offered by PR firms. Ugh.

High-Speed Rail for NC?

Thursday update:
North Carolina's receiving $545 million from that pool of $8 billion for high-speed rail projects.
Here's the story that ran today in the Observer and the News & Observer of Raleigh. Here's the press release from the N.C. DOT.

The DOT reports that North Carolina got $520 million for improvements to tracks that will allow higher speeds between Raleigh and Charlotte and $25 million for projects to improve service reliability from Raleigh north to Virginia. Virginia received $75 million for improvements to the Richmond to Washington section of the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor.

A rail "fact sheet" from bytrain.org notes that the strategy in North Carolina is to improve the route incrementally by upgrading existing rights of way. (I.e., instead of wholesale replacement of the line or adding hot new technologies. Don't hold your breath for bullet trains or a French-style TGV.)

Wednesday night post: Apparently, tomorrow's the day it's announced who's getting the $8 billion set aside for high-speed rail projects. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is to appear and "make a Recovery Act announcement" at the Durham train station at 1:15 p.m, says an EPA press release.

Other news media are reporting in from other states. The Orlando Sentinel says President Obama will be in Tampa, and Florida is likely to get $1.25 billion to $1.4 billion. Crain's Chicago Business says Midwest and California also getting money. Some 13 rail corridors in 31 states will get money. Which has me thinking, the Charlotte-Richmond line might not be getting so many pennies after all.

Pat Simmons of the N.C. DOT rail division wouldn't confirm anything, but he said the Charlotte-Richmond corridor asked for $5.4 billion for corridor development. The idea would be to make a lot of fixes along the route to trim travel time. And (this is my wish) maybe add a few more trains?

The N&O's Bruce Siceloff is on the case. He'll snoop out details, I'm sure. See his Crosstown Traffic blog.

Big News for Buzzers, Letter-Writers

OK, folks, here's your big chance. The Observer's e-mail system is down for a second day. We're told that whenever it comes back, there's a chance we'll lose anything sent since Friday.

To you, that means: OPPORTUNITY! That's because our stash of letters to the editor and Buzz items for the editorial pages is empty. The competition for getting your letters and Buzz items published will be much, much easier. In other words, the lottery odds got better.

Feel free to tell any and all friends, neighbors, family, co-workers and the folks you meet in the grocery store checkout line.

Remember, letters to the editor should be 150 words or less and include your name, address and daytime phone number - we don't publish them but we use them for verification. Getting your facts straight is a big plus. So is avoiding libel. We reserve the right to edit for brevity, accuracy and correct English. We put a thumb on the scale for letters that are different from our editorial opinions.

Send them to thecharlotteobserver@yahoo.com. Our trusty Forum editors are standing by.

That pane from on high, or down low?

That glass that fell and broke on the sidewalk yesterday? Les Epperson with the City of Charlotte's solid waste services saw the blogpost and called late yesterday to say he'd send a crew to clean it up and look into what happened. We had a small chat about the famous building in Boston whose glass windows showered passersby – the John Hancock Tower, designed by I.M. Pei and Henry Cobb. Eventually all its window panes had to be replaced, costing $5 million to $7 million.

Epperson called back today. "The glass had the consistency of automobile glass," he said. It didn't have a lot of sharp shards, as a glass window from a building would. He thinks it came from a vehicle. Whew!

And to whoever commented that it was not the brightest thing for me to go stand where the glass fell and look up, I must confide that as I was doing so, I thought, "This is not the brightest thing I could be doing ..." But journalists are like cats - we can't switch off the curiosity.

Glass from on high

So I'm out for a late afternoon walk to clear my head, standing on South Tryon getting ready to cross Stonewall Street over to the Gantt Center, and I hear something that sounds like a small explosion. Across the street, just next to the Juan Logan work out front of the Gantt, shards of glass appear to burst from the pavement. Lots of shards.

The wind is gusting mightily - not quite hurricane force winds but maybe 30 or so mph, I'd guess. With some anxiety, I cross the street and look up, and then down at the broken glass, and all around. There are a lot of very small pieces of glass, more than you'd get with a drink bottle. It's gray, not the color of beer or liquor bottles. I don't see any obvious gaping holes in the glass facade of the Duke Energy building, but spot some plywood way, way up high. Could the glass have fallen from that high? Seems unlikely. But where else would it have come from?

A woman who is crossing the street toward me, who had been walking up from the other direction, says she couldn't see where the glass came from either. Like me, she first thought it had come from the artwork in front of the Gantt Center.

I go up to Dean & Deluca, get some decaf - who needs caffeine after that experience? - and walk back to the office, avoiding either side of the block of Tryon in front of the Duke Energy building. The shards are still there. Wherever the glass came from, I think no one realizes it fell, or someone would be out sweeping away the evidence.

Finding that streetcar money

Just finished an interview with Charlotte budget director Ruffin Hall (NOT Ruffin Poole, just in case you're confused by the Ruffins), to find where in the budget this $12 million was hiding. What $12 million? See yesterday's post. Or read on.

Of course, it isn't really hiding. The city staff is pointing to a variety of city funds (listed in the city budget) that still have money in them, funds set aside for just this sort of thing: a project that arises unexpectedly for which elected officials would like to find money.

In this instance, the city is considering whether to set aside $12 million, which it would spend if it gets a $25 million federal grant. The $37 million total would build a 1.5-mile first segment of a proposed 10-mile streetcar line. The City Council is to vote Monday on whether to apply for that grant (plus another one that would add hybrid electric buses). If the city can't find/isn't willing to spend the $12 million there's no point in applying for the grant. Here's a quick rundown of the $12 million:

First, it is capital expense money. That's a separate, $803 million budget apart from the overall $1 billion operating budget that pays for things such as police officers and garbage collection. (You may or may not like the idea of spending the $12 million but it isn't money that could be used to hire more police.) Remember, too, the airport and the water/sewer departments, while counted in the budget, are self-sustaining "enterprise funds." (Also here's the perennial reminder: The city doesn't pay for schools, parks and recreation, welfare, mental health facilities or a variety of other needs paid by the county or state.)

- $2.5 million in streetcar planning funds. Last summer, in a controversial vote, the City Council allocated $8 million for streetcar planning and engineering. The contract came in for less, and $2.5 million is available. You can find it on page 166 of the city budget. Here's a link. This comes from a pot of money called PAYGO (pay as you go). This budget year the city put roughly $96 million into this fund, which is spent for things like transit maintenance, street improvements, roof replacements, etc.

- $10.5 million in reserve for economic development initiatives. This isn't PAYGO money. It's money set aside to repay debt the city might choose to take on. The council's transportation committee members Thursday said they'd use $5.5 million of this fund. Look on page 163 of the budget.

- $ 7 million in business corridor revitalization funds. These, too are PAYGO funds, as yet unspent. The committee didn't want to do this.

- $4 million in Smart Growth fund. That brings us to a multimillion "Smart Growth" fund, which the committee recommends using as part of the needed $12 million. Many folks wonder: The city just has $4 million sitting around that we didn't know about? I asked Hall. It turns out the money isn't just sitting around in some secret account. It's been used to help with transit-oriented development along South Boulevard.

Hall said it's a revolving fund (i.e., the city replenishes it with money the fund itself generates) that the council hasn't put money into for years. Because it doesn't get money allocated to it, it's not a line item on the budget. It would be on the city's financial statement, he said. Here's a link to that. I ran out of time to do more than a search for "Smart Growth" which turned up nothing. (Other writing deadlines loom larger and larger as I type this.)

Hall said the Smart Growth fund was used, for instance, when the city spent money for its proposed Scaleybark transit oriented development project. When the city sold the land to a developer (the project is stuck in the recession and is delayed), the money went back into this fund. I have a call in to Economic Development director Tom Flynn, in whose department Hall said, the fund sits. Hall didn't know whether taking $4 million would drain the fund.
Update: Flynn just called. He says that when Scaleybark Partners, the developer, repays the city in February the Smart Growth fund will have $4 million in it. It was set up as a revolving fund 9 or 10 years ago, he said, to be used for projects of that sort.

Bottom line: Money is fungible. A smart city manager will always keep things flexible enough so he or she can find funds for projects the elected officials want - or for things that arise unexpectedly midyear. I want managers who can do that. At the same time, I think the public (and elected officials) are owed more transparency about how much money is sitting, awaiting expenditure. It's smart to have some reserve money. It's also smart, if you're a council member, to know just what your reserve money is and where it lives in your budget.

Streetcar seems to have momentum

Judging by the votes at a City Council transportation committee meeting this afternoon, the council is likely to vote Monday to apply for a couple of federal grants for transit. One would be for a $15 million project to add more buses on Central Avenue, Beatties Ford Road and out to the airport, essentially doubling the frequency to every 10 minutes. As Patsy Kinsey said – matching what an Observer editorial on Tuesday said – that decision is a "no-brainer."

The other grant is trickier. It would be for $25 million to build a 1.5-mile section of the city's proposed streetcar project. This part would go from Presbyterian Hospital down Elizabeth Avenue (where tracks are already laid) and East Trade Street to the Transportation Center. (If you're not from around here you may not realize Elizabeth and Trade are the same street, with a name change).

The committee voted 3-2 to recommend the city go for the grant. Voting for: committee chairman David Howard, at-large rep Susan Burgess, District 1 rep Kinsey. Voting against: District 7 rep Warren Cooksey, District 4 rep Michael Barnes (who is running for district attorney in November).

Total project cost would be $37 million if the city decided not to buy new streetcars but to use three "replica" (that is, faux historic) trolley cars it owns. How to make up the $12 million difference from the $25M grant? City staff proposed that the council, if it wanted, could use $2.5 million still unspent from a streetcar planning budget line item, $4 million remaining in a "Smart Growth" fund that City Manager Curt Walton said was set up about 10 years ago but never completely spent, and it could take $5.5 million from $10.5 million that remains, unspent, in a reserve fund for economic development. The staff had also pointed to the option to reallocate $7 million from its business corridor revitalization program, but the council members at the committee meeting didn't like that idea.

Barnes' objection: Using the economic development money might mean less money available in the future for improvements to the North Tryon Street light rail corridor. Cooksey (who in 2009 voted against spending any city money for the streetcar project) said he worried that it would not be taken well by the city's partner communities in the Metropolitan Transit Commission. Especially the North Mecklenburg towns still waiting, somewhat patiently, for money to be found to build their commuter rail line. He also said you could do just as much for transportation if you used the "found" money to build sidewalks and bike lanes.

I have to say, it always amazes me how city managers can find little pockets of millions of dollars just when their council member bosses need them. $4 million for "Smart Growth"? Who knew?

Counting likely votes Monday, I'd say the streetcar wins, 7-4. Mayor Anthony Foxx, remember, doesn't vote on those sorts of things.

Sen. Nesbitt, welcome to Charlotte

Sen. Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe, the N.C. Senate's new majority leader, visited fair Charlotte on Wednesday to meet and greet and, it would seem, reassure the business community that he will be just as business-friendly as his predecessor, Sen. Tony Rand of Fayetteville.

Accompanied by Sen. Malcolm Graham, D-Mecklenburg, Nesbitt stopped by the Observer's editorial board - for which we are grateful - and as we chatted, before Graham arrived, he talked a bit about the need for better public transit, especially rail. Seems he had gotten caught in a lengthy traffic jam driving I-95 past Washington. "It was a hundred-mile traffic jam, from Baltimore to Richmond," he said. "We've got to find another way."

But then, he started talking about rail transit and how it hasn't been successful. Mentioned Charlotte's new (as of 2007) light rail line and asked how it had worked out. We told him it had beat all its ridership projections and was in most parts deemed a success. "Oh," he said.

I think Charlotte Area Transit System (aka CATS) leaders might want to buy the man a lunch or three and take him for a spin on the Lynx some rush hour afternoon ...

My colleague Jack Betts, who among his many valuable contributions writes the This Old State blog, recalled:

Back in the 1990s when legislators could still accept such trips, the Charlotte Chamber brought legislators to Charlotte for a Hornets basketball game and a tour around town. I wound up strolling around the Blumenthal with Nesbitt and another House appropriations chair, David Diamont of Surry County. It was obvious neither of them got to Charlotte much, and they seemed to be awestruck with all the new buildings, the cultural amenities – including some built with state assistance – and the can-do atmosphere that marked a city clearly on the rise. They were struck by how many things Charlotte had and aspired to, compared with the rest of the state.

The things they saw in Charlotte were not new things that no one from elsewhere wouldn't have known about, and it struck me that Charlotte was not a part of the state that these legislators visited often.

Nesbitt's remarks about transit Wednesday seemed to show that he had not spent much time in the Queen City since then, either. It's not that he doesn't get around. With a district in Buncombe, a law practice and a stock car racing team he helps his son with, and a legislative concentration on what went wrong with the state's badly botched mental health reforms, he has stayed busy – and as Senate majority leader he'll be busier yet.

Betts concluded: "If I were the Charlotte transit folks, I'd have a representative sitting in his office tomorrow morning at 8 a.m."

No 'Age of Aquarius' at planning department

Best line in the agenda for tonight's City Council zoning meeting, which is a rezoning meeting and the agenda is put together by the city's planning department. Under item No. 6, regarding zoning petition 2oo9-067:
"The Zoning Committee voted 4-1 to recommend DENIAL of this petition. The following outstanding issues have been addressed: (and then a long list of things such as setbacks, parking counts and buffers)
"14. Astrological Services has been deleted as a permitted use"

Update: I asked Tammie Keplinger of the planning department. Her reply:
"The Zoning Administrator has indicated that astrological services are office uses. It doesn’t need to be specifically listed on the site plan because it would be an allowed use in the O-1(CD) district."

No word yet about fortune tellers or palm readers, but one could assume they, too, are office uses.

I'll be at the meeting, "Tweeting" at @marynewsom. Here's link to the agenda.

EPA video spotlights Charlotte, Dilworth

New video posted on the EPA's Web site lauds the city's Urban Street Design Guidelines and the East Boulevard Road Diet, which illustrates the city's transportation design goals. Check it out. Mayor Anthony Foxx, ex-Mayor Pat McCrory, council member Susan Burgess, ex-council member and current city department head Patrick Mumford and others talk about how great the Urban Street Design Guidelines are.

It stems from the city's National Award for Smart Growth Achievement, announced in December, in the "Policies and Regulations" category for the USDG.

Yet the developers' lobby, the local Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, as well as influential, long-time real estate magnate John Crosland Jr., are still urging the city to dial back – or un-adopt, or never actually codify into ordinances, or otherwise eviscerate – those same USDG. They don't like the requirements for modestly shorter blocks, or the width of the planting strips (wide enough so street trees will survive) or the general policy to build more streets and sidewalks in new developments. It'll add cost, they say. And yep, it will.

But what's the cost of congestion? What's the cost of not being able to ride a bicycle or walk anywhere? What's the cost of street trees that die? What's the cost of having to retrofit streets and build sidewalks into already built neighborhoods - at taxpayer expense. The costs exist. It's just a question of where you inject them into the growth process: at the start, or later on and spread among a wider group of payers, i.e. us taxpayers.

Visions of the City

If you've an interest in city-building and city design, mark these lectures on your calendar.
UNC Charlotte's School of Architecture's spring lecture series is "Visions of the City." It's part of the inaugural year of UNCC's new Master's degree in Urban Design housed at the School of Architecture.

The first is in uptown. The rest are at the School of Architecture on the UNCC campus, Storrs Hall 110.

Jan. 20, 6-7:30 p.m. - "Design After the Age of Oil" - Gary Hack, Knight Theater, co-sponsored with Charlotte Center City Partners.

Hack is professor of urban design at the University of Pennsylvania. He is former chair of Philadelphia City Planning Commission and has prepared plans for more than 30 cities in the United States and abroad, and was the lead urban designer in the team of Daniel Libeskind’s winning design for redeveloping the World Trade Center site in New York. Free, but you must rsvp to: rsvp@charlottecentercity.org

Feb. 3 "Cities After the End of Cities" - Robert Fishman - 5-6:30 p.m., UNCC Storrs Hall.

Fishman is professor of architecture and urban planning at the University of Michigan and a nationally recognized expert in urban history, policy and planning and, more recently, "ex-urbs." Among his books are "Bourgeois Utopias: The Rise and Fall of Suburbia (1987)," and "Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century: Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Le Corbusier (1977)." His most recent work is on "ex-urbs."

Feb. 17 - "Planning, Ecology and Emergence of Landscape" - Charles Waldheim - 5-6:30 p.m., Storrs Hall, UNCC

Waldheim is professor and department chair of Landscape Architecture at Harvard University. He coined the term “landscape urbanism.” Professor Waldheim’s lecture will provide a historical survey of the role of landscape architecture in the formation of cities and regions, and examine several recent projects in North America that propose landscape and ecology as creative drivers of urban design. Such propositions will suggest potential models for planning, informed by contemporary understandings of landscape and ecology as new media of urban design.

Feb. 24 "Recent Work" - Yung Ho Chang. 5-6:30 p.m., UNCC Storrs Hall.
Yung Ho Chang is a professor and heads the Department of Architecture at MIT. He taught in the U.S. for 15 years before returning to Beijing to establish one of the first independent practices in China, Atelier FCJZ.

Megaregions: Next big thing? Or just nutty?

Alan Ehrenhalt, respected editor of Governing magazine, has weighed in on the issue of "megaregions," wherein he questions this decades-old theory that metro regions (e.g. CharLanta( need to be treated as one entity. Hence the term, CharLanta.

I don't intend to be on a Richard Florida kick (See my posting about "The Ruse of the Creative Class") but Ehrenhalt does quote Florida as hopping on the au courant megaregions trend. But he goes on to note that transportation is one area in which planning regionally, or more to the point, megaregionally, makes sense.

Megaregionally? Charlotte can't even come up with transportation planning that recognizes that Cabarrus, Iredell and York counties have anything to do with traffic in Mecklenburg! As a certain editorial writer on the Observer's editorial board who is also a blogger opined Jan. 3 (you folks in the Charlotte region probably slept late and missed this):

Plan Transportation Regionally

It sounds like a bizarre camaraderie of dwarfs: MUMPO, GUAMPO, CRMPO, GHMPO and RFATS (in the Disney version he'd be the chubby, clumsy one). Let us not forget LNRPO and RRRPO (the small but snarling pirate dwarf?).
As if the names aren't funny enough, here's a thigh-slapper: All seven are transportation planning agencies for greater Charlotte.
Even if you toss out GHMPO (Greater Hickory Metropolitan Planning Organization) you still have an insane number of separate agencies ostensibly planning transportation in one metro region. And if you don't think transportation planning in Rock Hill-Fort Mill (RFATS) and LNRPO (Lake Norman Rural Planning Organization) doesn't affect transportation throughout the greater Charlotte region, well, you haven't traveled on Interstate 77.
Ask most planners and they'll tell you - off the record of course, so as not to tick off politicians - that sane transportation planning is mere fantasy until all six or seven MPOs and RPOs merge into one true metropolitan planning organization.
MPOs are federally mandated to plan "regionally." Indeed, Title 23 of the U.S. Code says an MPO should cover a whole metro area. However, smaller cities such as Gastonia or Concord have little interest in joining with the Mecklenburg behemoth, fearing their share of state and federal transportation money would shrink.
If the region's governments won't do the right thing, the state should force it. At least two men in Raleigh get it. N.C. Department of Transportation Secretary Gene Conti is savvy about transportation policy, politics and about true regional planning. So is Sen. Dan Clodfelter, a Charlotte Democrat whose seniority and smarts have given him significant clout in Raleigh.
And both states must figure out how an MPO can cross state lines, so York County, S.C., can join the region's transportation planning. Cincinnati, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., all have multi-state MPOs. It can't be rocket science.

To read all six of the editorial board's Agenda 2010 items, visit this link.

'The Ruse of the Creative Class'

Is Richard Florida, author ("The Rise of the Creative Class"), professor and guru of the Creative Class philosophy, just another Harold Hill selling bohemian coffee shops and brew pubs, instead of band instruments to gullible townspeople?

An article in the American Prospect, "The Ruse of the Creative Class," by Washington Post writer Alec MacGillis inches up to that conclusion – without completely landing it. But MacGillis point to the huge number of cities such as Elmira, N.Y., and Cleveland, that embraced Florida's theories – some of them paying rather a lot of money to his consulting firm – but haven't yet found creative class nirvana.

MacGillis writes, "... by some measures, yuppie idylls like San Francisco and Boston have lagged behind unhip, low-tax bastions like Houston and Charlotte, North Carolina."

Ouch! Unhip? Us? (And I know plenty of people are yelping, "low-tax"??!!!)

The lengthy article is nuanced and points out many complexities, and quotes Florida at length answering his critics. I recommend reading it – before you come to any knee-jerk decision on whether you do or don't agree with it, or with Florida.

That said, my take on Florida's theories goes roughly like this: He pinpoints something that has been important in some cities, but there's no silver bullet that will solve what ails many cities. If a city attracts more artists and creative types, it generally prospers. But simply declaring one's city to be "creative" doesn't make it so, nor does paying a consultant to come tell you you should be creative. (Charlotte tried that a while back. I don't think we're any more or less creative than we would have been. We're bigger now, so we have higher numbers of "creatives" but I'm pretty sure that was a result of growth, not any study for which anyone got paid.) Cities are organic and develop in organic ways that are hard to manage and predict.

What are our great places?

Skaters at The Green, where the ice rink is open through Saturday.

Contest alert: If there's a spot you think is a Great Place in America, you can vote from now until Feb. 25 at the American Planning Association's "Great Places in America" contest. Click on this link. I note that the Main Street in Greenville, S.C., is among the 2009 Great Streets.

I think we should go for it. Pick a few great spots in Charlotte, or maybe in nearby towns, and start voting.

- What about The Green uptown? It is a wonderful public space. (5:05 p.m.: A reader notes it's privately owned, not true "public" space.)
- What about East Kingston Avenue in Dilworth? It is a beautiful public street.
- What about the NoDa neighborhood, or Plaza-Midwood?
- Downtown Shelby, downtown Salisbury, downtown Concord.

Have at it.

Shrinking cities, 'shovel-ready' and more

That great Web site, Planetizen.com, and writers Nate Berg and Tim Halbur offer their take on the biggest planning issues of 2009. Top o the list, you'll not be surprised to see, is the Great Recession.

Next is "Shrinking Cities," followed by "The 'Shovel-Ready' Conundrum," and "High-Speed Rail."
Except for the high-speed rail, this region experienced all those travails.

The Planetizen recession article has a link with this woeful headline: "Architect Tops List of Hardest-Hit Jobs." Carpenters came in at No. 2. I think the devastation in the architure profession may be one of the great underreported stories of 2009.

The section on Shrinking Cities ends with a link to an LA Times report that a large commercial farm is buying abandoned land in Detroit with hopes of establishing a large-scale commercial enterprise. Here's another link, to a Fortune magazine piece on the same topic. It may sound crazy, but if so, a lot of respected planners are crazy. The Fortune piece notes: "After studying the city's options at the request of civic leaders, the American Institute of Architects came to this conclusion in a recent report: 'Detroit is particularly well-suited to become a pioneer in urban agriculture at a commercial scale.' "

The high-speed rail section includes this paragraph, quoting the always quotable author and dystopian James Howard Kunstler: "James Howard Kunstler, who famously said that America has 'a railroad system that the Bulgarians would be ashamed of,' commented that high-speed rail is overspec'd and unnecessary. In 2009, Kunstler wrote that 'Californians (and the U.S. public in general) would benefit tremendously from normal rail service on a par with the standards of 1927, when speeds of 100 miles-per-hour were common and the trains ran absolutely on time (and frequently, too) without computers (imagine that!)'

There are a wealth of links. Happy reading.

About those butt bins

A quick update from Moira Quinn at Charlotte Center City Partners, re the new cigarette urns uptown:

"The urns are all in Uptown. They were installed on Wednesday, December 30. The TOTAL cost for all 24 was $3,000 (about $125 each). They will save a lot of man-hours to keep city crews from picking up the cigarette butts from the sidewalks. We pride ourselves on having clean sidewalks, so we would have expected our uptown crews to sweep them up. Hopefully, there will be fewer to sweep and those crews can spend their time doing other work."

This refers to my posting yesterday about the new cigarette urns.

Foxx makes his moves

Sorry about the lengthy hiatus, faithful readers. Vacation happens, thank goodness. Meantime I've been stashing away tidbits for you.

Foxx makes committee announcements: I don't think the Big O had an article on this, but in mid-December Mayor Anthony Foxx announced the City Council committee assignments. This sounds like City Hall inside-baseball, but City Hall watchers know they matter. Committees can speed up issues, stall them or sometimes make them disappear. Here's where having a Democratic instead of a Republican mayor changes the landscape. Notice the committees with the most influence over policies and ordinances that affect growth, development, transportation, etc.:
- Foxx has split Economic Development and Planning (aka ED&P and formerly chaired by Republican John Lassiter). The new ED committee is chaired by Democrat Susan Burgess. Transportation (formerly chaired by Foxx) is now Transportation and Planning, chaired by new Democratic council member and former Char-Meck Planning Commission chair David Howard.
- Environment continues to be chaired by Republican Edwin Peacock III, but the committee now has a Democratic voting majority: Peacock, Dulin and Democrats Burgess, Howard and vice chair Nancy Carter. (Republican Warren Cooksey leaves the committee.)


No Butts Uptown? Coming to uptown (unless they're already there – it was too cold today to go check): New cigarette disposal urns on waste receptacles on uptown sidewalks, courtesy of the City of Charlotte's Solid Waste Services. See photo at right. This, of course, is sparked in part by the new ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, effective Jan. 2. The city notes that it picks up thousands of cigarette butts daily from sidewalks and streets, and those butts are not biodegradable. When they wash into storm drains and then into the creeks they release toxic chemicals into the water, such as arsenic, acetone, lead, toluene, butane, cadmium, etc. So stow your butts, smokers.

Enviro-artist to stick around: Environmental artist Daniel McCormick, whom I wrote about here (and check the cool video link there) – who created the art at Freedom Park – has had his residency at the McColl Center for Visual Art extended through January. He and other collaborators are working on a proposal to keep him here for six months to design a “master plan” for three years of artists/sites along the Carolina Thread Trail.

Wilmore wins magazine kudos: Southern Living magazine declared Wilmore and South End among the South's Best Comeback Neighborhoods. I was on vacation but the City Council voted down the rezoning for the Wilmore church on Dec. 21. (And I am here to report, courtesy of chef and hostess extraordinaire Susan Patterson of the local Knight Foundation office, that the devil's food cake featured on the cover of the December issue was as delicious as it looked.)